That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā … š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar ...
More

That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā … š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar process, called Jespersen’s Cycle, said to have occurred in French, whereby the pre-posed negator ne became associated with an emphatic post-positive particle pas ‘step’—and, in some French vernaculars, with a post-positive pas alone. Yet the similarity between Arabic and French is purely superficial, lacking supporting linguistic evidence. Forcing the facts of Arabic into preconceived theoretical constructs, both formal and functional, engenders erroneous conclusions. The source of the Arabic negator -š is polar interrogation, for which evidence does indeed exist in various Arabic dialects, including Andalusi, Egyptian, Levantine, Maltese, Tunisian, and Yemeni. The polar interrogative šī, itself derived from an existential particle, ultimately arose from the Proto-Semitic presentative ša and 3rd person pronouns šū, šī, and šunu. Supporting evidence for this comes from the West Semitic Modern South Arabian languages, which possess an existential particle, an indefinite determiner, and inchoate interrogative śi analogous in form and function to that of the Arabic šī. With this, it becomes possible to propose the operation of a different cycle in Arabic: the negative-existential (or Croft’s) cycle. Such comparative evidence from Arabic dialects and sister languages, along with historical records of an Arab presence in the Fertile Crescent centuries before the arrival of Arabic speaking Muslims in the 7th century AD, provides convincing evidence for the antiquity of the Arabic dialects.Less

Arabic Indefinites, Interrogatives, and Negators : A Linguistic History of Western Dialects

David Wilmsen

Published in print: 2014-10-30

That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā … š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar process, called Jespersen’s Cycle, said to have occurred in French, whereby the pre-posed negator ne became associated with an emphatic post-positive particle pas ‘step’—and, in some French vernaculars, with a post-positive pas alone. Yet the similarity between Arabic and French is purely superficial, lacking supporting linguistic evidence. Forcing the facts of Arabic into preconceived theoretical constructs, both formal and functional, engenders erroneous conclusions. The source of the Arabic negator -š is polar interrogation, for which evidence does indeed exist in various Arabic dialects, including Andalusi, Egyptian, Levantine, Maltese, Tunisian, and Yemeni. The polar interrogative šī, itself derived from an existential particle, ultimately arose from the Proto-Semitic presentative ša and 3rd person pronouns šū, šī, and šunu. Supporting evidence for this comes from the West Semitic Modern South Arabian languages, which possess an existential particle, an indefinite determiner, and inchoate interrogative śi analogous in form and function to that of the Arabic šī. With this, it becomes possible to propose the operation of a different cycle in Arabic: the negative-existential (or Croft’s) cycle. Such comparative evidence from Arabic dialects and sister languages, along with historical records of an Arab presence in the Fertile Crescent centuries before the arrival of Arabic speaking Muslims in the 7th century AD, provides convincing evidence for the antiquity of the Arabic dialects.

Explanations of the grammatical reflexes of the Arabic particle šī, especially in interrogation and negation, are generally mistaken on two counts: they begin their developmental sequences (clines) ...
More

Explanations of the grammatical reflexes of the Arabic particle šī, especially in interrogation and negation, are generally mistaken on two counts: they begin their developmental sequences (clines) with the Arabic of writing, and they propose structures that, while appearing to be well-formed, are nevertheless not idiomatic. Assuming an origin in the Arabic of writing is especially perilous because, without supporting evidence, it assumes that that variety is the original, when the gatekeepers of Arabic writing proscribe the types of change proposed for the spoken language that are supposed to have originated with it. Consideration of the many grammatical functions of šī provides contrary evidence that the phenomena were always elements of the dialects, arising independently of and probably before writing.Less

fīš wa biddīš : The functions of šī

David Wilmsen

Published in print: 2014-10-30

Explanations of the grammatical reflexes of the Arabic particle šī, especially in interrogation and negation, are generally mistaken on two counts: they begin their developmental sequences (clines) with the Arabic of writing, and they propose structures that, while appearing to be well-formed, are nevertheless not idiomatic. Assuming an origin in the Arabic of writing is especially perilous because, without supporting evidence, it assumes that that variety is the original, when the gatekeepers of Arabic writing proscribe the types of change proposed for the spoken language that are supposed to have originated with it. Consideration of the many grammatical functions of šī provides contrary evidence that the phenomena were always elements of the dialects, arising independently of and probably before writing.